Sphere ToT Report

Training of Trainers on The Sphere Project Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response
New Delhi, India 12th-19th February, 2012
Supported & organized by:
12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India
Training of Trainers on The Sphere Project Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response Sphere India, a National Coalition of Humanitarian Agencies in India, in collaboration with Oxfam India, Concern Worldwide, CASA, Plan India, EFICOR, PCI India and Lutheran World Relief organized eight days residential Training of Trainers on The Sphere Project Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response at New Delhi, India on 12th-19th February, 2012. The TOT was attended by 23 participants including from from Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and different states of India. The training received high level of acclaim and appreciation by the participants. The report narrates the background, key purpose, specific objectives, training activities, session observations, feedbacks and evaluations of the TOT.
Dates: Duration: Venue: No. of Participants: Facilitators:
12-19 February, 2012 8 days (residential) Hotel Atrium, New Delhi (India) 23 Mr. Vikrant Mahajan Prof. Kartikeya Misra Mr. Mayank Joshi Ms. Chandrani Bandyopadhyay Mr. N. M. Prusty Mr. Raman Kumar Mr. Vikrant Mahajan Mr. Raman Kumar
Page 2 of 53
TOT Coordinator: Report compilation:
Contents
1. 2. 3. 4. Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 5 Background ............................................................................................................... 7 Training process ........................................................................................................ 8 Session observations: ............................................................................................... 14
4.1 4.2
4.5.1 4.5.2 4.5.3 4.5.4 4.5.5
Day 1: Introduction to the Course, Expectations (Vik, KM, CB): ..................................... 14 Day 2: ......................................................................................................................... 16
Flip tips (KM) .................................................................................................................................. 16 What is Sphere (CB) ....................................................................................................................... 16 The Humanitarian Charter (Vik)..................................................................................................... 17 Protection Principles (Vik) ............................................................................................................. 17 The Project Cycle, Core Standards and Cross Cutting Issues (MJ, CB) .......................................... 18
4.3
4.5.1 4.5.2 4.5.3 4.5.4
Day 3: ......................................................................................................................... 18
Power point tips (MJ) ..................................................................................................................... 18 Using technical standards and indicators (Vik) ............................................................................. 18 Code of Conduct (MJ) ..................................................................................................................... 19 Introduction to other Global Quality and Accountability Initiatives (Vik, Ashish) ...................... 19
4.4
4.5.1 4.5.2 4.5.3 4.5.4 4.5.5
Day 4: ......................................................................................................................... 20
Cross cultural tips (Vik) .................................................................................................................. 20 Adult learning principles (KM, MJ) ................................................................................................ 21 Assessing Learning Needs, Planning Trainings (KM) ..................................................................... 21 Designing trainings (KM, MJ) ......................................................................................................... 21 Training methodologies (MJ, CB) ................................................................................................... 21
4.5
4.5.1 4.5.2 4.5.3 4.5.4
Day 5: ......................................................................................................................... 22
Managing Nerves (Vik) ................................................................................................................... 22 Constructive feedback and evaluation (KM, Vik) .......................................................................... 23 Training tips, dialouge, question-answer: Quality Circle (MJ, KM) .............................................. 23 Introduction to participants led sessions ...................................................................................... 23
5. 5.1 5.2 5.3
Training evaluation ................................................................................................. 24 Summary of participants daily feedbacks ............................................................. 24 Summary of Facilitators daily and end of training review process......................... 25 Summary of participants evaluation at the end of the training............................. 26
5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3 5.3.4 5.3.5 Which part of the workshop was most useful for you? ................................................................ 27 What improvements/changes would you suggest for another workshop? ................................. 27 How will you use the Sphere handbook in your work? ................................................................ 28 Any other comment/suggestion .................................................................................................... 28 Structure and content of the TOT .................................................................................................. 29
6.
Summary of key recommendations for future TOTs: ................................................. 31
Page 3 of 53
a. b.
To Sphere Project and other trainers: .............................................................................. 31 To the Organizing Committee .......................................................................................... 31
7.
a. b. c. d. e. f. g.
Annexes................................................................................................................... 33
List of participants .......................................................................................................... 33 TOT schedule .................................................................................................................. 37 Learning monitoring index .............................................................................................. 39 Confidence meter ........................................................................................................... 40 Discussions in Quality Circle: ........................................................................................... 42 Revised training schedule (Participants led sessions):....................................................... 44 Session Designs and reports of participants led sessions ................................................. 45
Page 4 of 53
1. Executive Summary
This report presents an overview of the background, key purpose, specific objectives, training activities, session observations, feedbacks and evaluations of the Sphere Training of Trainers (ToT) program conducted in New Delhi, India from the 12th February to 19th February, 2012. The training was facilitated by a team of resource persons, all from India. The lead facilitator was the Chief Operating Officer of Sphere India (Sphere India steers the inter-agency coordination and Sphere processes in India). One of the co-facilitators was from the Administrative Training Institute of State Govt. of Rajasthan (primarily contributed in soft skills and adult learning sessions) and one was from the National Institute of Disaster Management, Govt. of India (primarily contributed in Sphere sessions, she is also a Sphere TOT trained). One more resource person was from Project Concern International and had prior experience of Sphere TOTs. The TOT was attended by 23 training participants (3 Females and 20 Males) out of which 6 came from Sphere India member agencies (EFICOR-2, CASA-1, Plan India-3), 6 from other humanitarian agencies in India (WSPA-2, Compassion India-1, NCDHR-1, IDF-1, MSF-1), 2 from South Asia (PCIBangladesh, CHA-Sri Lanka), 6 from State Inter-Agency Groups (Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, Orissa, Tamil Nadu, Bihar-2), and 3 were from from Sphere India secretariat. There were 3 more participants (2 females and 1 male) who attended the training but since they did not meet the above criteria, they were awarded with certificate of participation in Sphere Training instead of TOT. (They had limited knowledge knowledge of Sphere handbook and no experience of training). The participants profile varied from senior management to middle and field level staff. The participants also had different levels of understanding on Sphere and training processes. The participants comprised of mixed profiles and had minimum understanding of Sphere and the adult learning processes. There has been considerable learning obtained along the process which was claimed by the participants as indicated in the learning records and participant reactions, as well as by the facilitator team. This TOT was the first one conducted using the latest edition of Sphere handbook (2011) in India. The new training materials for Sphere introduction, Protection and humanitarian charter were used by facilitator team as inspiration to design their specific sessions. The TOT manual for Sphere Handbook 2004 was introduced to participants for their inspiration, however, the focus was on developing capacities in participants to design their own training sessions using different Sphere resources. In few of the sessions, the facilitators modified the delivery, methodology and strategy to meet participants expectations and needs. The participants led sessions were useful in developing a curriculum for 2-day Sphere training in field. The session designs are compiled as a sample in annexure. The participants felt that more time could be given for the preparation of such exercise. The participants feedbacks were highly encouraging and it was recorded in the feedbacks that the participants found the Sphere handbook 2011 edition very comprehensive and useful in their work. Few of the participants also shared that although they were aware of the handbook but they have realized the strength of this handbook only in this training and that, now they feel more comfortable
Page 5 of 53
in not only using the handbook but also in its application in their organization in their respective roles. It was recorded during the discussions and quality circles that most of the participants had been using the handbook in one or other ways in their work particularly in assessments, relief package selection, in implementing their project (core standards), coordination etc. Most of the participants were eager to transfer the knowledge they have gained during the TOT to their colleagues in their organization, their partners, and in communities. The daily feedbacks by the participants and the daily review by facilitators on the training process have helped to make improvement for the next-day training. The final training evaluation confirmed the perception that the majority of the participants rated high on the achievement of the training objectives and the relevance of the training to their work. The training was evaluated using the standard evaluation form and the outcomes are captured in the report. The evaluation results may be adopted for future Sphere trainings as it helps the facilitators to improve with more objective assessments. At the end of the training sessions, there are some specific recommendations and observations forwarded by the facilitators and the participants for different external stakeholders which can be considered for insertion in the future trainings. In general, the training was deemed by the participants as a high learning event.
Page 6 of 53
2. Background
India being a country of diverse geographical features and also with diversity in the people faces a large number of disasters. The nature of hazards and vulnerabilities of the people are very diverse and required lot of contextualization for effective solutions. Largely its the poor and the marginalized communities, the women, children and other vulnerable groups who get affected the worst, as their socio-economic vulnerability are further exposed by disasters, making them victims of circumstances. The recent experience in disaster situations in India viz. Kosi Floods in Bihar, Cyclone Aila West Bengal, Leh flash floods, Sikkim Earthquake, floods in different states have opened up the need for multi-pronged approach and strategies to build resilience among the communities and to work in collaboration to reduce disaster risk among the communities. The varying capacities of organizations/agencies responding to recent disasters in India, especially on needs assessments, prioritization, response management and targeting, have given enormous opportunity to work towards improving the overall response mechanism towards disasters through extensive capacity building efforts at various levels. The Sphere handbook has become one of the most widely recognized tools for improving humanitarian planning and response. Since the publication of the 2004 handbook, there have been a number of technical advances, new cross-cutting issues have evolved, and the humanitarian environment has changed with the launch of the Humanitarian Reform process and the Cluster approach. On 14th April 2011, the 2011 edition of Sphere handbook was launched, with protection principles, updated humanitarian charter, qualitative and quantitative indicators, key actions, guidance notes and enhanced linkages between sectors. The handbook has been most widely used by the agencies and professionals involved in humanitarian interventions across the globe. Trainings on Sphere process and the handbook have been the most effective way to manifold the reach of the handbook to number of agencies and professionals. In view of growing interest from Sphere India member agencies on the new edition of the Sphere handbook, Sphere India TCBP sub-committee felt the need of organizing Sphere TOT to meet the need. The need was also high as there had been no TOT organized in the last few years in India. Sphere India along with Oxfam India, Concern Worldwide, CASA, Plan India, EFICOR, PCI India and Lutheran World Relief have come together to host a training of trainers on the newly developed SHPERE 2011 to assist in developing capacity of humanitarian practitioners to build capability, to share their knowledge, promote good practice and raise awareness about the importance of appropriate humanitarian delivery.
Page 7 of 53
3. Training process
The training process has been very elaborate to follow the necessary steps for preparation, implementation and evaluation. The details of the process are illustrated below:
a) Organizing Committee for the TOT

Sphere India Training and Capacity Building Programme (TCBP) sub-committee comprising of CRS, UNDP, UNFPA, NIDM, IIPA, VASUDEVA, IFRC, Plan India and EFICOR decided to have an organizing committee for the TOT. The Organizing committee was formed of TCBP sub-committee members and OXFAM, LWR, Concern Worldwide and CASA. The key role of the organizing committee was to oversee the planning, preparations, participants selection, and course material and to ensure overall quality of the program. The organizing committee discussed electronically and telephonically on the planning and preparations of the TOT and had a meeting on 23rd January, 2012 to review the preparations, participants, trainers, course materials etc.
b) Terms of reference
The terms of reference for the TOT were developed in consultation with the Organizing Committee.
c) General purpose of training

The general purpose of the TOT was to strengthen facilitation knowledge and skills in delivering the Sphere Project Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian response training. The objective of this training was not to thoroughly study the content of The Sphere Project or its Handbook, since participants were expected to have prior knowledge, use of and/or practical experience in utilization of the Sphere Guidelines prior to the start of the course.
d) Specific objectives
By the end of the training of trainers, training partners will be able to: Apply the Sphere Handbook as a tool for disaster response Define the links between the Humanitarian Charter and humanitarian action Describe the structure and content of the Sphere Handbook State the principles of adult learning and apply them to designing and running a Sphere learning event Define content, and write aims and objectives for Sphere training workshops Demonstrate a range of training and facilitation skills Prepare for running a Sphere learning event in the field or for your organization Devise tools and techniques for assessing learning needs and for evaluating training.
Page 8 of 53
e) Participants
The SPHERE 2011 ToT was expected to host between 25-26 people from the below groups: Sphere India member agencies Participants from South-Asian countries Seats for other countries Sphere India and State IAGs internal participants 10 participants 6 participants * 4 participants * 5-6 participants
The total number of participants was 23 out of which 6 came from Sphere India member agencies (EFICOR-2, CASA-1, Plan India-3), 6 from other humanitarian agencies in India (WSPA-2, Compassion India-1, NCDHR-1, IDF-1, MSF-1), 2 from South Asia (PCI-Bangladesh, CHA-Sri Lanka), 6 from State Inter-Agency Groups (Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, Orissa, Tamil Nadu, Bihar-2), and 3 were from from Sphere India secretariat. The following criteria were considered for participants selection, the participants were expected to: Has attended the Basic Training on the Sphere Project Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian response; Has experience in the use of the Minimum Standards in Humanitarian response. Has been commissioned by their institution/organization; Willing to prepare some background material prior to training Available for the complete duration of the training. Has a plan to utilize the lessons learnt from the ToT early after the training has finished. Able and willing to provide recommendations for the improved design of advanced capacity building activities both within and externally of their organizations. Preparations: Prior to attending the ToT, all participants were expected to review the handbook "the Sphere Project Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian response" 2011 Edition, Prepare a basic draft training plan, and provide some facilitation materials.
There were 3 more participants who attended the training but since they did not meet the above criteria, they were awarded with certificate of participation in Sphere Training instead of TOT. (They had limited knowledge knowledge of Sphere handbook and no experience of training).
f) Facilitation team
The TOT was facilitated by the following team: Mr. Vikrant Mahajan Lead Facilitator, vik@sphereindia.org.in, +91 9818666831 Mr. Mayank Joshi Co-facilitator, mjoshi.55@gmail.com, +91 9825046643 Ms. Chandrani Bandyopadhyay Co-facilitator, chandrani.b@gmail.com, +91 9811767403 Prof. Kartikeya Misra Co-facilitator, kartikeya_msr@yahoo.co.in, +91 9414238197
The Organizing Committee has provided inputs for identification of the facilitation team.
Page 9 of 53
g) Training Design preparations

The facilitator team initially engaged online through emails, and via telephone to review participant profile, organize learning need assessment of the participants, participant group and expectation analysis and decide on the strategic training approach, Training Design, Schedule, methodologies, specific session designs, training materials and logistical arrangements.
h) Participant Group Analysis and Learning assessment

There were 23 participants, 3 Females and 20 Males. The participant group had a rich experience of working in disaster management in India (Indian participants, except one). The participants from Sri Lanka and Bangladesh had rich experience of humanitarian work and added a lot of value in the group. More than 70 % of the participants had experience of delivering trainings and had some understanding of training processes. The participants profile varied from senior management to middle and field level staff. The participants also had different levels of understanding on Sphere and training processes. To sum up, the participants comprised of mixed profiles and had minimum understanding of Sphere and the adult learning processes. However, the facilitators had a wide range of adult learning methodologies especially to engage participants in the field level trainings. The list of participants is attached as Annex 1.
i) Strategic Training Approach

Looking at the participant group analysis and the findings from learning need assessment and participant expectation analysis, the training team decided to follow a flexible approach to the delivery of the specific sessions. They tweaked the session designs for few sessions to meet participants expectations and to accommodate the variety in the participants profile. Some of the session specific decisions were consulted with the participant groups. The strategic approach was focused towards building the facilitation and platform skills in the participants and later, test and improve on these skills during the participants led sessions on the Sphere handbook. More emphasis was given on adult learning approach and engaging the participants in the learning environment through variety of participatory approaches. The primary focus was to develop both the facilitation skills necessary and the adult and organizational learning approach required for successful implementation with all participants. The new modules of the Sphere handbook 2011 edition (Humanitarian Charter, Protection Principles and Core Standards) along with the document of significant changes in the new edition of the handbook were given to each participant. The 2004 training package module was also provided to them as reference for designing their sessions, and adopting / contextualizing the tools and methodologies for their use.
Page 10 of 53
j) Final Training Design and Training Schedule

The training is designed to operate for 7 full days and 1 half day, which includes 4 (four) parts: Part 1: Sphere Training 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 Introduction to Sphere Training Introduction to Sphere 2011 Project Cycle, Core Standards and Cross cutting issues Using technical standards, key actions and indicators The Humanitarian Charter The Protection Principles Code of Conduct The Sphere Project Mainstreaming in India
Part 2: Adult Learning 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 Adult Learning Principles Assessing Learning Needs Designing a Learning Events Skills and methods for facilitators and trainers Learning Review Managing nerve Power point tips Training tips
Part 3: Mini/maxi-facilitation (Participant led sessions for practicing Knowledge and skills acquired) 3.1 Mini-facilitation: This was done on the first day of the training in which participants introduced each other in a buddy pair and then made a brief presentation of 5 minutes on topic of their choice (selected from options of Disaster Management topics or Training related topics). The presentations were video-recorded and the clips were provided to the participants for review and reference. They also had options to consult the facilitators on their videos and seek individual feedbacks. 3.2 Maxi-facilitations: The participants were provided opportunity to lead sessions and practice the learning they have got in the TOT. The participants designed a 2 day training on Sphere and they delivered on the sessions. The 2 day participants led training design included: o Assessment o Technical Standard WASH o Technical standard Food & Nutrition o Technical Standard Shelter, Settlement & NFI o Technical Standard Health Action o Convergence and Coordination o Monitoring and Evaluation o Simulation The revised training schedule in attached in annexure (e)
Page 11 of 53
Part 4: Other Global Quality and Accountability Initiatives 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Introduction to HAP Introduction to INEE Introduction to LEGS Introduction to ALNAP, SEEP etc.
k) Training Methodology
This training used variety of adult learning participatory methods such as: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) 14) 15) 16) 17) Micro-facilitation/teaching Self-Study Interactive presentations Discussion groups Games/outdoor activities Fish Bowl Bus stop Brainstorming Reflection Consensus building Group work Case study Plenary dialogue/discussion/debate Sharing (expectation, experiences) Question & answer, Quiz Peer coaching Role play
l) Learning aids used:

1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) White Board Flip Charts PowerPoint Video presentations Handouts Gallery Meta clips Post It Visual aids
m) Training Materials
Informed by the participant group analysis and decisions on training approach, the new training materials for Sphere introduction, Protection and humanitarian charter were used by facilitator team as inspiration to design their specific sessions. The TOT manual for Sphere Handbook 2004 was introduced to participants for their inspiration, however, the focus was on developing capacities in participants to design their own training sessions using different Sphere resources. For better
Page 12 of 53
understanding and quick references, additional handouts for both Sphere and Adult learning resources were planned for the participants. Besides, number of materials was provided in soft copy to participants for their future reference and use. Soft copies of INEE booklet, HAP booklet, LEGS etc. were also provided to them.
n) Participants evaluation and feedback

The participant-led sessions were evaluated by the peer group and the training team. The constructive feedback as individuals and groups were given to the participants by the peer group and the training team. An analysis of the participant led sessions was developed for the organizing committee for their future reference. The analysis may also be used to inform the processes for revision of Sphere Project Training Policy.
o) Accreditation
The accreditation was provided to those participants that attended and were proactively engaged in the complete duration of the course. There were 3 participants who attended the training but since they did not meet the training criteria, they were awarded with certificate of participation in Sphere Training instead of TOT.
Page 13 of 53
4. Session observations:
4.1 Day 1: Introduction to the Course, Expectations (Vik, KM, CB):
The session started with an outdoor exercise of ball and pipe in which participants were divided into two groups and they were given 1 ball to each group and cut pipes to each participant. The aim was to put the ball in a bowl which was put in the middle of the two groups. There were conditions that the ball should not touch the ground, should not roll back, should not touch any body part etc. Figure 1: Participants during the iceThe covered the general purpose and specific objectives of the training, training schedule, methodologies etc. The participants agreed on norms for the training (through fish bowl method). Following are the agreed norms for the training: Dos Respect to all participants. Listen to all participants. Use phone calls only during breaks. Give equal opportunity to all. Decisions by consensus Parking lot for un-resolved issues/out of session topics. Punctuality Time management Relevance to agenda Participatory approach Donts Do not use laptops during sessions. Avoid cross talking or making subgroups.
breaking exercise
Learning from the game: Few people had experience so they thought that the assignment is very easy. But this was not so. Coordination and implementation was difficult. Ideas were generated but not shared and if shared, they were not heard. Creating rules and assigning roles helped in doing the task.
The participants agreed on training management by participants groups and the followiing were the designated groups for each day of training:
TRAINING MANAGEMENT TEAMS

Day Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 Day 6 Day 7 Day 8 Team name Fortuners GRR The Disciplinarian Seaguls Harmony The R'th Team members Kamal, David, Snehil Tushar, Pramod, Satish Green, Raman, Raju Jaya, Mari, Bibhas Ashish, Neha, Paras Baleshwor, Manu, Hansen Raj, Harsh
Page 14 of 53
PARTICIPANTS EXPECTATIONS: The participants were also asked to share their expectations from the training, which are as below: Sphere related: Articulation of Sphere Vocabulary and Humanitarian Charter Application of Sphere for Disaster Response and Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Forming more Sphere Trainers so as to take Sphere to a wider Group Come to know how limited resources could be used to meet minimum standards for disaster affected people Sphere Handbook as a tool for disaster response Get to know the structure and content of Sphere Handbook & how to use it Lessons learnt and experiences from training partners How to materialize Sphere standards, in our organization/work How the Protection issues are being considered in ER How to contextualize indicators Training related How to use the handbook for training of response team or capacity building of CSOs To be a good trainer Promoting the humanitarian charter & minimum standards among the Govt. Sector, District/local coordinators To learn post training evaluation/follow up with the participants/ organizations To learn Scientific and Proper Training Needs Analysis Improved presentation/ knowledge transfer skills Others Learning New things More knowledge from the experiences of others All the facilities going on right way or proper manners To achieve at least 70% of the training objectives perfectly Improve my communication skills in a way people find interesting and engaging Confidence to take up any random query How we can do advocacy with government level Well participation for improvement It will produce an intensive collaboration for a long term basis with right process To learn mechanism of making government delivery system sensitive To be able to know the persons/agencies in state with whom collaboration may be done to take the Sphere training forward
MINI-PRESENTATIONS: The participants were given post-its on which Tom and Jerry were written. They had to identify their buddy pairs and introduce each other to the rest of the group. Subsequently, they had to make their 5 minutes presentation on the topic of their choice. This whole session was vedio-recorded and later, the videos were given to all participants for review and self-reflection.
Page 15 of 53
4.2
Day 2:
The facilitator introduced the matrix of confidence meter and daily learning index to the participants and asked them to self-rank themselves on the ranking of 1-10 in which 1 represents the lowest and 10 the highest. This was to be done everyday so that the participants can rank themselves progressively and know the progress in their learning and confidence. The learning index and the confidence meter matrix are attached as annexure (c) and (d).
4.5.1 Flip tips (KM)

The facilitator gave tips on using flip charts as a training aid. He explained the benefits and limitations of flip charts in comparison to LCD projector (PowerPoint). Selection of pen colour also plays very important role in the effectiveness of using flip charts. The below two principle should be kept in consideration while using flip charts: KISS: Keep It Short and Simple KILL: Keep It Lerge and Legible This applies for use of sentences on flip chart. This applies for use of fonts on the flip chart. The The sentences should be short, prefereably fonts should be large and preferebly in capital bullet points. letters.
4.5.2 What is Sphere (CB)

Few of the participants had used Sphere handbook in their work earlier but most of the participants did not know about the changes in the Sphere handbook 2011 edition and majority had little understadiing of the contents of the handbook and using the technical standards. The facilitator used variety of methodlogies to introduce them to the Sphere process and the handbook. The new video of the Sphere was shown to the participants to make them Figure 2: Ms. Chandrani leading the session on What is Sphere understand the rationale and development of the Sphere handbook. The new presentation on 2011 edition was introduced to the participants and it helped them to understand the Sphere process and the structure of the handbook. The participants were asked to refer to various sections in the handbook which made them undestand the structure and how to find any specific topic in the handbook. The session was received well by the participants and they shared that now they are able to use the handbook when required. They were also able to appreciate the importance of the process and minimum standards in disaster response.
Page 16 of 53
4.5.3 The Humanitarian Charter (Vik)

The facilitator introduced the participants about The Humanitarian Charter and the changes in the chapter in the revised handbook. The facilitator used PowerPoint and took reflections from the participants on the whiteboard. The use of examples, sharing from different situations helped the participants understand the importance of the humanitarian charter and its significance in the handbook. The facilitator asked the participant groups to session on Humanitarian Charter read the humanitarian charter and explain this to other groups. The facilitator added to the discussion where required.
Figure 3: Mr. Vikrant interacting with participants during
The session was felt quite useful by the participants and they reflected that the humanitarian charter is very important for any humanitarian action.
4.5.4 Protection Principles (Vik)

The facilitator started the session with an exercise in which all participants were assigned roles of some stakeholders (NGO, INGO, Media person, Policeman, military personnel, PLWHA, Old aged person, 60 year old blind dalit women, 5 year old girl, adolescent girl, local contractor, pregnant woman, widow, orphan etc.). They stood in a single line and were given different situations on which they had too react as per their feeling of being protected (how protected they feel in a Figure 4: Participants during an exercise to understand given situation). This exercise was perceived well protection and its relation & meaning to various and helped the participants to understand that stakeholders protection needs are not only for the most vulnerables but it may be required to other sections of the community as well in different degrees. Further, the facilitator shared the participatns with the protection principles with help of a PowerPoint. The participants appreciated the session and shared their understading on protection principles in different scenarios.
Page 17 of 53
4.5.5 The Project Cycle, Core Standards and Cross Cutting Issues (MJ, CB)
The facilitator asked participants experiences on project cycle and captured them in the session to reflect on the project cycle and various phases. He linked it to various core standards and cross cutting issues and used the experiences of the participants to correlate them. The facilitator asked the participants to read the cross cutting issues in their groups and make a flip chart presentation and explain it to other groups. The session helped the participants to interlink Figure 5: Mr. Mayank facilitating discussions on project cycle and its relation to core standards the core standards and cross cutting issues with the project cycle.
4.3
Day 3:
4.5.1 Power point tips (MJ)

The facilitator showed a video on powerpoint mistakes that few presenters happen to do while making powerpoint presentations. The video was quite helpful to explain the basic points of using powerpoint in a funny way. There was another video shown by the facilitator which again helped participants to understand the dos and donts in a powerpoint presentation. These tips were quite useful and were appreciated by the particiapnts.
4.5.2 Using technical standards and indicators (Vik)

The facilitator used a table top exercise to make the participants understand minimum standards, key actions, key indicators and guidance notes; and also how to use them. The facilitator gave 1 sentence (all words mingled) to each group and asked them to find out the sentence in the handbook and indetify whether it is a minimum standard, a key action, or a key indicator. Futher the groups had to go through that particular sentence, and explain that to other groups in a Figure 6: Participants in a table-top exercise on Sphere logical flow (minimum standard, key action, key handbook
Page 18 of 53
indicator and then guidnace note). The presentations were done in bus stop method. The facilitator explained all the participants about the use of technical standards and the indicators with the presentations made by each group. He also shared the participants on How to use the standards from page number 7 in the English version of the handbook. The session was well appreciated by the participants and majority of them expressed that now they feel more confident in using the handbook.
4.5.3 Code of Conduct (MJ)

The facilitator made the participants to go through the code of conduct principles in Sphere handbook and present it to the rest of the groups. The facilitator added to the discussions with his experience and understanding from different scenarios. The IFRC video on Code fo Conduct was used to build deeper understanding of the principles. The discussions among the participants on the topics of code of conduct helped the whole group to learn and understand the importance of Figure 7: Participants going through the Code of Conduct code of conduct. in Sphere handbook and having discussions on the same
to build further understanding
A handout on staff code of conduct and mini Case studies to illustrate the cases were also used to link code of conduct principles to practical situations in the field. The session was appreciated by the participants however, they shared if more time could have been given to this important session and discussions.
4.5.4 Introduction to other Global Quality and Accountability Initiatives (Vik, Ashish)
The facilitator started the session with a role play. He asked two participants (volunteers) to do a role play on how few agencies may behav with disaster victims in disaster situations. This was focused on how resources convert into power in a disaster situation. Further, discussions were built on the role play to make the participants understand the important of code of cunduct for agencies as well as humanitarian aid-workers. The facilitators shared the participants about Figure 8: A role play done by 2 participants to represent how resources covnert into power during emergencies other global quality and accountability initiatives including Humanitarian Accountability Partnership (HAP), Livestock Emergency Guidelines and
Page 19 of 53
Standards (LEGS), Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE), Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance (ALNAP). One of the participants was from World Society for Protection of Animals (Dr. Ashish) and he shared a presentation on LEGS to rest of the group. The facilitator used a debate among the Figure 9: Dr. Ashish (WSPA) sharing about LEGS to the group participants on the importance of education during emergencies and further built on the understanding of the participants on the subject with experiences and views of other participants. The session was perceived well and participants shared that more involvement of participants could be done in sessions.
4.4
Day 4:
4.5.1 Cross cultural tips (Vik)

The facilitator shared about various aspects of cross-cultural issues in different set of people, enviornment and situations. The understanding of non-verbal communication and body language is very important when we deal with people of different cultures. Cross cultural communication is about dealing with people from other cultures in a way that minimises misunderstandings and maximises your FEW TIPS ON CROSS CULTURAL potential to create strong cross cultural relationships. COMMUNICATION: This session was highly appreciated by the participants and they shared that this has helped them in understading behaviour and communications in different scenarios and with different people.
Non-verbal communication in India In Indian context, sometimes the non-verbal communication is very different from western countries. One motion that is hard to decipher is the movement of the head to denote yes or no. Some Indians shake their head from side to side when they mean yes while some others move it up and down to say yes and sideways to say no. And then there is a third head movement that is hard to describe. It is between a nod and a shake, and involves moving the head in a kind of a semi-circular motion. It means yes too but can baffle someone who is not aware of its existence. Another sometimes perplexing practice is plain silence, which could be used to mean either yes or no. Often keen observation of the body language is necessary to throw light on a persons true reactions. Even when English is the common language in a cross cultural situation, this does not mean you should speak at normal speed. Slow down, speak clearly and ensure your pronunciation is intelligible. Effective cross cultural communication is in essence about being comfortable. Giving encouragement to those with weak English gives them confidence, support and a trust in you. In many cultures business is taken very seriously. Professionalism and protocol are constantly observed. Many cultures will not appreciate the use of humour and jokes in the business context. When using humour think whether it will be understood in the other culture. Many cultures have certain etiquette when communicating. It is always a good idea to undertake some cross cultural awareness training or at least do some research on the target culture.
Page 20 of 53
4.5.2 Adult learning principles (KM, MJ)

The facilitator started with discussion on difference between education and training and then shared them about differnet ways of learning. He also shared about different styles of learning. He shared about the principles of adult learning and discussed with them on differences between child learning and adult learning styles. The participants were shared about the Kolbs exeriential learning cycle. The Kolbs learning style inventory was practiced by all participants to understand their own leanring behaviour and needs. the facilitator shared handbouts to the participants on learning styles. The session was perceived well by the participants.
4.5.3 Assessing Learning Needs, Planning Trainings (KM)

The facilitator started from the learning of the previous session and introduced the participants that different people may have differnet learning styles and so different learning needs. The participants were shared about different levels of training needs analysis and the facilitator shared that a training intervention is required in case the TNA reflects on some gaps in attitude, skills and knowledge of the assesses. The participants were also shared about the various steps in a TNA exercise. The facilitator added to it with the theory of confort zone and shared that challenging situations also make an individual learn a lot in some cases.
4.5.4 Designing trainings (KM, MJ)

The facilitator shared the participants about how to design a training on the identified need through a TNA and how to set learning objectives. He shared about the various steps of a learning event and other requirements for designing a training. The facilitator also shared that the key learning messages in a particular training could be divided into three sections. One of this is the must know part which the participants must know during the course of the session itself. The other is should know which the participants may pick up during the session as the facilitator shares about the topic and the discussions proceed. The third one is could know which a participant may know by refering to the documents provided of the links, reference sources etc. This was perceived well by most of the participants.
4.5.5 Training methodologies (MJ, CB)

The facilitators shared the participants that there may be different methodologies to deliver any particular content. The facilitator shared that given the principles of adult learning, training methods play an important role in transferring knowledge and skills and changing attitudes. Appropriate training methods cut across knowledge, thinking, doing, and feeling. Different training methods may include Demonstration with return demonstration, Talk or presentation, Role-play, Buzz group, Case study, Group discussion, Plenary discussion, Field visit, Brainstorming, Drama etc.
Page 21 of 53
Selecting an appropriate training method depends on variety of factors including what are the learning objectives, content of session, participants profile (how many participant, their characteristics, learning style), whether the trainer is comfortable with the method, time availability, cost associated, space and equipment required etc. The participants were engaged in a game win as much as you can to understand experiential learning method. The session was well received by the participants.
4.5
Day 5:
4.5.1 Managing Nerves (Vik)

The facilitator started the session with asking the participants about what difficult situations they have felt during delivering trainings. Some of the points were as below: Sl. No. 1. Difficult situation Time management How to deal with Transfer the control to the participants groups. Form training management team Set norms in the beginning of the training Having informed participants may be a strength. They can be used as a good resource to solve most of the participants questions. Have content which is suitable for a basic level participant as well as can create challenge for an experienced participant. (handbout on group dynamics was distributed by the facilitator) Divide the key learning messages in must know, should know and could know A facilitator may not always the master of the content/subject. His/her role is largely to create the environment in which learning may happen. He/she has to link the learner to the content by using variety of methods, environment etc. Meet individuals during breaks and evening Take feedbacks and improve Improve various sitting / space usage Reach to participants and groups, interact with them Thinking of a trainer should not start from the contents, rather it should begin with the identified objectives and aim to deliver the key learning message through any suitable method and tools.
2.
Informed /dessent participants
3.
Diverse group
4. 5.
Differnet expectations Trainer not knowing the content
6. 7.
Trainers rapport with participants Space management
8.
Contextualization of the content
Page 22 of 53
4.5.2 Constructive feedback and evaluation (KM, Vik)

The facilitator shared tips on constructive feedbacks and how to give and receive feedbacks. the facilitator shared that feedback is one of the most effective ways of learning more about our self. It has been said that the last thing we learn about ourselves is the effect we have on others. The facilitator engaged the participants in practicing it by giving and receiving feedback in peer group. The need and significance of evaluation was discussed and a handout was shared illustrating four levels of evaluation. Different methods of the immediate evaluation as being used in this training were discussed.
4.5.3 Training tips, dialouge, question-answer: Quality Circle (MJ, KM)

The facilitators opened the floor for question-answer and dialouge between the participants and the trainers. It was done through a process of quality circle and participants were engaged very actively in the process. The key questions and discussions annexed in annexure (g).
4.5.4 Introduction to participants led sessions

The participants were provided opportunity to lead sessions and practice the learning they have got in the TOT. The participants designed a 2 day training on Sphere and they delivered on the sessions. The 2 day participants led training design included: Assessment Technical Standard WASH Technical standard Food & Nutrition Technical Standard Shelter, Settlement & NFI Technical Standard Health Action Convergence and Coordination Monitoring and Evaluation Simulation
The facilitators familiarized the participants with the existing and revised modules of Sphere ToT and how to use them in designing trainings and sessions on Sphere. The norms for the participant led sessions to put the learning into practice was shared again with the participants. The participants were formed in groups of 3 people each and every group had 90 minutes time for their topic. They had to make presentations (20 minutes each person) and then a slot of discussion and feedbacks by peer group and facilitators was kept for 30 minuts for each group. The evaluation was based on: Individual performance in the presentation Team performance (of session) Performance of entire group (2 days training)
Page 23 of 53
5. Training evaluation
All the participants have expressed the interest to use the training process forward to strengthen their programs and take Sphere work forward in their respective organizations. During the preparation time it was decided to evaluate the training at different levels to demonstrate different evaluation methodologies and the complete evaluation process to the participants. Accordingly, the daily participant feedback and facilitation team reviews were conducted every day. The reaction level evaluation of the training was performed after the training. The indicators of Sphere institutionalisation at the agency level were also shared for agency level evaluations on mainstreaming Sphere. From both the anecdotal feedback and the participant feedbacks collected at the end of every day and post training evaluation by the participants, organising committee and training team, the Delhi TOT seems to have met the training objectives and in many cases surpassed expectations. The summary of learning from participant daily feedback and facilitation team review process and the post training participant evaluation is discussed below:
5.1
Summary of participants daily feedbacks
The daily feedbacks were collected from participants through a range of methodologies proved very useful to progressively improve the quality of training delivery. The feedbacks were incorporated in the forthcoming sessions to the extent possible and others were recorded for reporting and better planning of future TOTs. Below are some of the points recorded from the daily feedbacks of the participants: Training could have been better if more trainers were involved. It could have benefited the participants with diversity of thoughts, experience, background etc. Community dinner had helped participants to form a team. The facilitators friendly and open behavior made us easy and the environment became more conducive and friendly. Lead trainer (Vik) tried to accommodate all (or most) of the suggestions given by the participants in his sessions and PPTs. It was good and important. Logistics was perfect (food, hotel, accommodation etc.) 8 days are very long and it was not easy, but the training was wonderful and we learnt a lot. Tips on using PowerPoint and flip chart could have come later (instead of coming in the first 2 days) because as a participant, I observed whether the trainer is following them or not. Lot of emphasis was given on learning process. Groups were not shuffled and this limited the learning from other people and groups. Training coordinator (Raman) very well managed all things simultaneously. He always had positive response to everyone whoever approached him for anything. Using local language could have been avoided as there were foreign participants as well. The session on constructive feedback was very helpful. On the whole the tips learned in the ToT are very good.
Page 24 of 53
Participants were happy because all participants got chance to lead sessions. Many participants shared that lots of things were new to them and it was quite useful for them to be part of this learning process. Comfort zone concept was good. It was being realized that many of the participants experienced it. Links to real life experiences are very useful. Many new things especially the use of boards, tools in training session, evaluation & feedback well explained. Methodology was more interactive. The participants interest in learning was very high and immediate reactions were demonstrating quick learning. The matrix for daily learning index and confidence meter were very useful. Flexibility in schedule to meet participant expectations was good; however the time management could have been better. Schedule was very tight. It may be little relaxed. More time could have been given at the beginning of the training to orientate participants with course materials and the existing sphere modules.
5.2
Summary of Facilitators daily and end of training review process
The facilitator team and the organising committee overall felt very happy with the outcome of the training, the achievement of the training objectives and the expectations. The spirit of the learning group was positive and a strong commitment was evident in their forward plans to implement Sphere within their organisations and as inter agency efforts. Overall the facilitation was very effective and there was a lot of learning noted by each facilitator for future trainings. Some of the observations were: The participants profile was very dialectic. It could have been more uniform with majority at least at desired level of understanding of Sphere. The participant selection criteria for the TOT should be adhered to. Daily facilitator planning and de-briefing strengthened the process. There could be better coordination in the training team. In some cases the session preparations could have been better. The lead trainer shall examine the readiness and preparedness of the trainers for their sessions well in advance to avoid changes and last minute anxieties. It would be better if facilitators session plans were available to share before the Course starts. A proper time for preparation should be allocated. Follow-up of training needs to be done with the participants and respective organizations. Good facilitation and 1 half-day break kept energy levels high and reduced need for energizers.
Page 25 of 53
5.3
Summary of particip ants evaluation at the end of the training
The summary of consolidated feedback collected through the standard evaluation form of Sphere ToT and the evaluation form designed by the organising committee is given below.
Achievement of workshop aims and objectives
Relevance of content to your work
NA Poor Average Good Excellent
Impact on the way you work
Pace and balance of the workshop
Quality of the learning materials and aids
Facilitation and presentation of the training
Page 26 of 53
Quality of pre-training information
Quality of the venue and accommodation
5.3.1 Which part of the workshop was most useful for you?
Almost 39% of the participants shared that the Sphere training was very helpful in enriching their understanding on Sphere handbook, humanitarian charter, standards and their inter-linkages. Approx. 30% of the participants shared that the contents of adult learning were very helpful and helped them in enhanciing their training skills. More than 26% of them liked the participants led sessions and shared that it helped them in building their confidence. Tips on using flip charts, powerpoint, managing nerves and cross cultural tips were also liked by many participants. Sessions on code of conduct, protection principles, humanitarian laws were also mentioned by few participants. The experiential learning during the training was also shared as useful part of the training by few participants.
5.3.2 What improvements/changes would you suggest for another workshop?

Pre-training information can be given much in advance. Some more pre-training materials could be given for better preparations. More inter-sectoral sessions could be planned. More tools and methodologies in the training so that they can be practiced at later stages by the participants. More time for preparation of participants led sessions 2 More number of facilitators/resource persons having diversified experience 3 Slightly loose schedule, it was very hectic. Correlating theories with humanitarian actions Time management according to schedule 2 Better content and delivery (there is always room for improvement) International experts could be brought in the training Consider the time spent on daily basis Consideration of the limitation of language More participatory style is suggested Prior intimation to agencies so that desired participants could be allowed to participate. More number of learning handouts
Page 27 of 53
There is need to inform well in advance. The resource persons have to be changed according to the contents. The sitting style, arrangements has to be changed everyday to make more comfortable and meaningful. Classes should begin at 9:00 AM. Incorporating trainees experiences (Like LEGS sharing by WSPA person) should be more. Incorporate more case studies Its only regarding pace of workshop/training. If we are learning, there is need to be very careful. Some messages might not be communicated properly due to extra pace.
5.3.3 How will you use the Sphere handbook in your work?
Designing project, in planning new proposals (2) Training of staff, In conducting trainings specially in disaster programs (4) At least minimum standards are met during the time of disaster response, In disaster management and relief work, On collective process towards disaster response, in relief distribution (4) Using core standards, protection and cross cutting issues in field. To prepare a group of cadres for trainings in community level Internalizing the Sphere in different domains It could be used in planning, implementation and monitoring I will utilize Sphere standards in my work such as project implementation, format, assessment, trainings etc. Effort would be to familiarize Sphere handbook among the stakeholders and adherence of minimum standards Have to discuss with Director as we have our own tools Its directly connected to look forward to weave the concepts into practice. First of all I would like to train my co-workers and colleagues. Then once disaster will occur, we will try 100% use of the handbook and its practical use. I will aware the community about the standards Sphere handbook is dedicated primarily for disaster response, but to me, everything is relevant to other sectors. Key actions could be emphasized with local context.
5.3.4 Any other comment/suggestion

We could bring people from various other facets of field The team formation process for the participants led sessions should start early after 2-3 days of the workshop. Well done Sphere India Team !!! It was beautifully organized and managed programme Inauguration of training could be done by senior person, stakeholder Totally a fantastic and useful training TOT is my first experience so I do not have any idea
Page 28 of 53
This workshop needs to be organized with Government level for easy adoption and implementation. A dedicated Hindi TOT should be organized. Please give more emphasis to context rather than training methods. Good people and good training Learning should be practiced in a live project/ environment
5.3.5 Structure and content of the TOT

Recommendation for the next/future Sphere ToT Maintai Revise/ Replace with n improve 20 3 0 20 2 More time 19 4 0 18 5 0 14 12 17 16 12 16 Designing and Planning Trainings 11. 12. 13. Flipchart Tips 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. Managing Nerves PowerPoint Tips Cross cultural Tips Training Tips Dialogue, Questions and Answer Design of Training and Process of Session Designs for participant led sessions Participants led sessions Sphere Mainstreaming and Institutionalization in India and South Asia 18 17 15 12 16 17 15 15 4 5 7 10 7 6 8 8 Training Methods Constructive Feedback and Evaluation 15 16 17 7 7 5 9 10 5 6 10 6 0 More time and more practice required Details required. Documents could be given during session More time required. Methodology can be changed. Methodology can be changed. 0 More details required. Demonstration was required. Practice required. More practice and examples More examples 0 0 0 0
Sl. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
Topics Introduction to Sphere Training of Trainers Introduction to Sphere The Humanitarian Charter Protection Principles The Project Cycle, Core Standards and Cross Cutting Issues Using Technical Standards and Indicators Code of Conduct Introduction to companion standards and other quality + accountability initiatives Adult Learning Principles Assessing Learning Needs
Page 29 of 53
Forward Action Plans 22. 23. 24. Personal/group consultation with facilitators Social Evening and break for Surajkund Fair 15 18 20 7 5 2
Written action planning required. 0 Could be better
Page 30 of 53
6. Summary of key recommendations for future TOTs:

a. To Sphere Project and other trainers:
There should be a new training manual for 2011 edition handbook. This may also include case stories, field stories and examples from the practitioners who have used the handbook in their work. There are many humanitarian professionals who have enough experience and understanding on Sphere process and handbook to be part of the TOT training team. The Sphere Project training policy may be modified to involve these professionals as trainers in the TOT training team. All TOT graduates may not be accreditated as Sphere trainers. They may require further exposure and handholding from senior trainers in delivery of Sphere trainings. The training team may give ranking/ recommendations on the TOT graduates on their training skills, performance etc. The Sphere Project training policy may acknowledge this point. The training team should analyse the participants profile much in advance and prepare the training structure accordingly. If required, the training structure may be changed to accommodate the participants expectations and their varied learning needs. However, the emphasis should be given to get the right profile of participants for the TOT. The IFRC Video on agency code of conduct and mini case studies on staff code of conduct were used and worked well. Recommended for future trainings. TOT process and structure worked well. It can be used as it is for future trainings. The general perception of Sphere in Asian context (validated from India, South Asia, Indonesia and Philippines experience) is that it is about numbers (indicators) and standards (quantitative indicators are perceived as standards). More materials may be developed to build the understanding on what is Sphere, the complete Sphere framework and how the framework works.
b. To the Organizing Committee

Participant selection criteria shall be strictly adhered to. If not possible it makes sense to organise and two day Sphere orientation training before TOT. A participant profile and status quo report should be sent out to the training team at least two week prior to the training. Lead trainer shall assess the level of preparedness of other trainers. Facilitators sessions plans and presentations shall be prepared well in advance, assessed and agreed by the training team. This can happen before training team preparatory meeting and there should be an opportunity to critique each others session plans using conference or skype calls for discussion.
Page 31 of 53
The facilitation team size of 3 is ok if all trainers are experienced with ToT. In case of inexperienced/not confident trainers, additional trainer shall be planned. Optional guest trainers may be involved for specific sessions. In case there are senior trained professionals among the team and there is a window to involve them with the training, this shall be explored. Training schedule shall not exceed 8 hours of training time in a day. Adequate breaks and participants own time shall be there to maintain participant energy levels especially during last days of training. Participants views and feedbacks shall be respected, discussed, agreed or disagreed with proper reasoning; otherwise it may disengage the participant from learning process and may also be distracting for other participants. Logistics: The venue is ideal for training workshops of small groups of 20-30 people. Recommended for future trainings. The support team was excellent.
Page 32 of 53
7. Annexes
a. List of participants
Sl. No. 1. Picture Name Mr. Green Thomas Phone 9971688007 E-mail greeneficor@gmail.com Organizatio n EFICOR
2.
Mr. Pramod Pal
8051304224
pramodp_28@yahoo.com
EFICOR
3.
Mr. Satish Kumar Singh
09430744160, 08092489741
satishksingh06@gmail.com, satishksingh06@yahoo.com
CASA, Bihar (LWR)
4.
Mr. Rajan Gautam
9304377259
rajangautam@sify.com
IDF, Bihar (LWR)
5.
Mr. Tushar Kanti Das
9771413500
Tushar.das@planindia.org
PlanInternationa l (India chapter) Plan India
6.
Mr. Harshvardha n Sharma Mr. Hansen Thambi Prem Dr. Ashish Sutar
8800594021
harshvardhan.sharma@planinternational.org
7.
9810169117
hansenthambiprem@wspaasia.org
WSPA
8.
9958595345
ashishsutar@wspa-asia.org
WSPA
9.
Ms. Snehil Rathore
8756398845
snehil@sphereindia.org.in
IAG Uttarakhand
Page 33 of 53
10.
Ms. Rupali Kar
9437011940
iagorissa@gmail.com
IAG Orissa
11.
Mr. Paras Nath Sidh
9929830310
parasnath36@gmail.com, paras@sphereindia.org.in
IAG Rajasthan
12.
Mr. Seemanchal
9439324170
sima.sorc@gmail.com, sima.ruturaj@gmail.com
NCDHR
13.
Md. Mostafa Kamal
:88017110024 kamal.pcibd@gmail.com; 36 kamal@pci-proshar.org
14.
Mr. Simionpillai Mariyadas Dr. Raju SMG
: + 94 77 3064552
simionpillai@gmail.com
Project Concern Internationa l (PCI), Bangladesh Consortium of Humanitaria n Agencies
15.
9650213203
raju.tiss@gmail.com
16.
Mr. Bibhas Chatterjee
09415339761, 09307021497
17.
Mr. Solomon David George Mr. Mari Rajan
9748899507
Mdecins Sans Frontires (MSF), New Delhi bibhaschatt@rediffmail.com, Gram maharajganj.PU@planindia. Niyojan org Kendra (GNK), Plan India sdgeorge@ei.ci.org Compassion East India
18.
9489081852
tmarirajan@padgom.org
19.
Mr. Kumar Vishnupad Manu
9430595716
kumarvmanu@bihariag.net, kumarvmanu@gmail.com
IAG Tamil Nadu: Peoples Action for Developmen t (PAD) Bihar Inter Agency Group
Page 34 of 53
20.
Mr. Kameshwar Kamati Mr. Raman Kumar
9472192010
gyanodayasimra@gmail.com , iag.madhubani@gmail.com
Gyanodaya and IAG, Madhubani Sphere India
21.
9910082661
raman@sphereindia.org.in, k.raman.kumar@gmail.com
22.
Mr. Baleshwor Singh Ms. Jaya Jha
8826655629
baleshwor@sphereindia.org. in
Sphere India
23.
98115-16095
jaya@sphereindia.org.in
Sphere India
24.
Ms. Neha Siwatch **
9811709254
neha@sphereindia.org.in
Sphere India
25.
Ms. Noushaba Nas PP **
9967814481
noushabanas@gmail.com
TISS
26.
Mr. Gaurav 9967797122 Upadhyay **
gaurav_upadhyay86@yahoo .co.in
TISS
** Three participants (Ms. Neha Siwatch, Ms. Noushaba Nas PP and Mr. Gaurav Upadhyay) were awarded with certificate of participation in Sphere Training instead of TOT as they did not meet required criteria for the TOT (They had limited knowledge knowledge of Sphere handbook and no experience of training).
Training team
27. Mr. Vikrant Mahajan 9818666831 vik@sphereindia.org.in Sphere India
28.
Prof. Kartikeya Misra
09414238197
kartikeya_msr@yahoo.co.in
HCM Rajasthan State Institute of Public Administrati on

Page 35 of 53
29.
Mr. Mayank Joshi
9825046643
mjoshi.55@gmail.com
PCI India
30.
Ms. Chandrani Bandhyopad hyay Mr. N. M. Prusty
9811767403
chandrani.b@gmail.com
31.
9811310841
nmprusty@yahoo.co.in
National Institute of Disaster Managemen t Sphere India
SPHERE INDIA ADMIN STAFF 1. Ms. Romita Anand 9873628227 romita@sphereindia.org.in Admin Officer
2.
Mr. Suraj Bahadur
9891006414
suraj.sphere@yahoo.com
Logistics Assistant
3.
Ms. Nitu Singh
9911439088
nitu25singh@yahoo.in
Admin Assistant
Page 36 of 53
b. TOT schedule
Place & Dates: Hotel Atrium, New Delhi, 12th February 19th February, 2012 Day 1, Sun 12 Feb, 2012 Day 2, Mon 13 Feb, 2012 Review (KM) Flip Tips Day 3, Tues 14 Feb, 2012 Review (MJ) PowerPoin t tips Day 4, Wed 15 Feb, 2012 Review (Vik) Cross cultural tips Day 5, Thu 16 Feb, 2012 Review (KM) Managing nerves Day 6, Fri 17 Feb, 2012 Day 7, Sat 18 Feb, 2012 Day 8, Sun 19 Feb, 2012
08: 30
Review
Review
Review
09: 00
Block 2 Introducti on to Sphere (Vik)
Block 6 Using technical standards and indicators (Vik, MJ)
Block 10 Assessing learning needs, Planning trainings (KM, MJ)
Block 14 Training tips Dialogue, questionanswer (MJ, KM)
Participa nt-led Session 1
Particip ant-led Session 6
Individu al time with trainers, interacti ons, quesans etc. as required

(not compulso ry)
10: 30
Participa nt arrival, Registrat ion
Break Block 3 The Humanitar ian Charter (Vik, NMP) Lunch
Break
Break
Break Block 15 Introducti on to participant -led session (Vik, MJ, KM) Lunch
Break
Break
Break
11: 00
Block 7 Code of Conduct (MJ, Vik)
Block 11 Designing trainings (KM, Vik)
Particip ant-led Session 7
12: 30
Lunch Block 8 Introducti on to other global Q&A initiatives (Vik, Ashish) Break
Lunch
Lunch
Lunch
13: 30
Block 4 Protection Principles (Vik, NMP)
Block 12 Training methods (CB, MJ)
Particip ant-led Session 8 Depart ures
15: 00 Block 1 Introducti on to the course, participant s video introductio ns, expectatio ns (Vik, KM, CB)
Break
Break Break
Break
Break Q&A initiative s in context of South Asia and India (Panel: NIDM, NDMA, Prusty) Break Action
15: 30
Block 5 The project cycle, core standards and cross cutting issues (CB, MJ)
Block 9 Adult learning principles (MJ, KM)
Block 13 Constructi ve Feedback & Evaluation (KM, Vik)
17: 00 17: Continue
Break Evaluation
Break Evaluation
Break Evaluation Plenary
Break Participa
Page 37 of 53
30 d of the day of the day of the day discussion -1 (if required for preparatio ns) nt-led Session 5

Plans & Recomm endation ; Evaluatio n& valedicto ry (all trainers ) Break Group/In dividual time with trainers Dinner
18: 30
Break Group/Ind ividual time with trainers Dinner
Break Group/Indi vidual time with trainers Dinner
Break Group/Indi vidual time with trainers Dinner
20: 00
Blocks relating to Sphere training Blocks relating to adult learning Blocks relating to participant practice
Page 38 of 53
c. Learning monitoring index Sl. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Name of Participant Green Pramod Satish Rajan Tushar Harsh Hansen Ashish Snehil Rupali Paras Seemanchal Kamal Mariyadas Raju Bibhas Solomon Mari Rajan Manu Kameshwar Raman Baleshwor Jaya Neha Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 Day 6 Day 7 4 6 6 6 7 8 8.5 5 6 7 7 7.5 7 8 5 5.5 5.5 6 6 7 8 3.5 4 4.5 5 6 7.5 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 8 8.5 5 5 5.5 5.8 6 7 7.3 4 5 6 7 8 8.5 8.5 6 6.5 7 7.3 7.5 8 8.5 3 4 5 5 5.5 6 7 5 6.5 6.5 7 7.5 8 5 5.5 6 6.2 6.5 6 7 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 7 5 5 5.5 6 6 6.5 7 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 5 6 7 7 8 8 8.5 1 3 4 5 5 5 6 4 5 6 7 7.5 8 8 2 6 5 4.5 6 7 8 4 5 6 8 8 8 8 6 6 7 6 6.5 7 8 6 8 8 8 9 9 9 3.5 4.5 5 6 6.5 7 7.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 3 5 6 7 7.5 7.5 8
The color codes depict the grading of the participants where lowest value (1) is marked with red, highest value (10) is marked with green and the rest are the shades with yellow as per the values. The below graph shows the average learning index of the group on each successive day of the training.
Page 39 of 53
Average Learning Index of Participants

9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 6.3 6.8 7.3 7.9
5.3 4.4
6.0
Value
4 Day
d. Confidence meter Sl. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Name of Participant Green Pramod Satish Rajan Tushar Harsh Hansen Ashish Snehil Rupali Paras Seemanchal Kamal Mariyadas Raju Bibhas Solomon Mari Rajan Manu Kameshwar Raman Baleshwor Jaya Neha Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 Day 6 Day 7 6 5 6.5 6.5 7 8 8.5 5 5 6 7 7 8 8 4 5 5 5.5 5.5 6.5 8 3.5 4 5 5.5 6 8.5 5 6 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 4 6 6 6.2 6.7 7.8 8 5 5 6 7 8 8 8 6.5 7 7.5 7.8 8 8 8 4 3 4 5 5.5 6 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 5 6 6 6 6.5 7 8 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 5 5.5 5.5 6 6 6 7 6 6 7 7 7 9 9 5 5.5 7 7 8 8 8.5 2 2 3 4 5 6 8 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 1 4 6 5 6 8 8.5 2 3 5 6 6 7 8 6 6 6 6 6.5 7 7.5 7 7 8 8 9 9 9 3.5 4 5 6 7 7 7.5 4 5 5.5 4.5 5 5.5 6 5 6 7 7 8 8 8
Page 40 of 53
The color codes depict the grading of the participants where lowest value (1) is marked with red, highest value (10) is marked with green and the rest are the shades with yellow as per the values. The below graph shows the average confidence meter of the group on each successive day of the training.
Average Confidence Meter of Participants

9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 6.3 6.8 7.3 8.0
5.9 4.5 5.1
Value
4 Day
Page 41 of 53
e. Discussions in Quality Circle:

SUCCESS STORIES/ LEARNING IN IMPLEMENTATION OF SPHERE STANDARDS IN DISASTER SITUATIONS: 1. India Bihar (Kosi floods, 2008): As a volunteer working with Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, Mr. Raju had conducted survey of 80 households using the assessment checklist from the Sphere handbook. Later in another flood in Bihar, they derived questions from the checklist for assessment. 2. Sri Lanka: Many NGOs try to use the Sphere handbook and standards but it has not been much successful. However, there is increasing awareness among NGOs about the handbook. 3. CASA: India Bihar (Kosi floods, 2008): CASA used Sphere standards in their response programme. 4. Sphere India: in all recent disasters, assessments were done on a common format and they were shared among different stakeholders in a coordination group. The response plans were based on the needs emerged from the collation of assessments. 5. India Orissa floods, 2011: The Orissa State Inter-Agency Group coordinated for the assessments and response in the affected districts. They shared information with the Orissa State Disaster Management Authority and maintained close coordination with them. IAG Orissa shared that their assessments are not owned by the Govt. but they are more interested in knowing what the civil societies are doing. 6. GNK Plan (Plan India): responded in non-food items but initially did not know that the materials are based on Sphere standards. Later they learnt about Sphere handbook and the standards. 7. WSPA: They received very useful information about livestock from Sphere India during Leh flash floods. This was helpful in planning their actions. 8. Leh flash floods: The GO-NGO collaboration platform was very helpful in coordination and information sharing. Later, they came up with lessons learnt which covered the challenges, and learning from the collaboration process. 9. Gujarat: Most NGOs do not know about Sphere standards and they respond immediately in case a disaster with whatever resource they have and whatever they can do. 10. EFICOR: They have used Sphere standards in providing food during disaster response in Tsunami, Orissa super cyclone, cyclone Thane, and many other small scale disasters like fire etc. EFICOR also has their own set of minimum standards which they follow. 11. Sphere India: Core standards of the handbook are being used largely by all agencies in India and the states (through state inter-agency groups). However, in terms of technical standards, many times it depends on agencys mandate. Like, CASA, EFICOR etc. target a particular population and do their response accordingly. Agencys reports reflect that the planning is done based on technical standards. It is observed that technical standards are followed and in few places they are appropriated and contextualized. Sphere India is planning to work towards developing agency specific response standards and collate the learning. 12. Sphere India and IAGs: IAG Orissa is a consortium of INGOs in Orissa whereas, IAG Bihar welcomes all agencies. Another model is IAG West Bengal which has Govt. also as a part of it. All IAGs have their own independent structure. Sphere India shared that IAG Orissa needs to be more principle based and be more inclusive and open.
Page 42 of 53
13. Govt. of India is bringing National Guidelines on Minimum Standards in Disaster Response which is developed in consultative process. Sphere India has been extensively involved in the process of development of these guidelines and around 90% of Sphere thinking has gone into this. The assessment checklists and formats have also been inserted into this. 14. Bihar Inter-Agency Group: They are going to organize a workshop soon in which they are going to link the Sphere standards and Bihar State relief code. The recommendations shall be shared to the Govt. 15. Cyclone Thane, Tamil Nadu: IAG conducted assessments of the affected areas. They did advocacy with the govt. and INR 4000/- was provided by the Govt. to each family initially and later, INR 1500 Crore rupees have been sanctioned by the the Govt. for the affected areas. MEASURES/MECHANISMS TO UNDERSTAND WHETHER AGENCIES ARE COMPLYING WITH THE STANDARDS 1. Sri Lanka: They have cluster approach in the country and they monitor the compliance. 2. So far agencies have not been sharing their reports to all but this could be very important learning process for all. 3. Sphere India is working on developing India Disaster Report 2011 and had sent questionnaire to number of IAGs and agencies who responded in different disasters in 2011. However, very few of them have responded to the questionnaire. However, IAGs have been very active platform in the states and have built strong binding among the members. Information sharing among all, joint assessments, sharing of individual assessments have been actively done. However, joint monitoring has not been done so far, and agencies monitoring/evaluation reports have also been not shared among all. 4. Bangladesh: They dont have IAGs but ECB (Emergency Capacity Building) which is a small network. Their activities are largely similar to the core standards of Sphere handbook. In recent floods, they collected assessments from partners and all of the 19 reports were quite different from each other and it was very difficult for them to collate them. They seek advice and suggestions from India experience of coordination. Other key discussion points were as below: How to use the information collected on the entry level behavior of participants? How to make sub-groups in the participants? Does the Sphere handbook have guidelines for IEC development? o No. the handbook does not have guidelines for IEC development. It talks about humanitarian charter, core standards and 4 technical chapters. IAGs and Sphere India are processes. Materials like IEC, tools etc. are developed in consultation with members in the coordination process. How do we monitor that the recommendations shared by civil societies to Govt. are followed by the Govt.: o There are several experiences on this. One experience was from fisher folk community where NGO had identified the need of appropriate method for drying fishes and their storage. After successful intervention in 10 villages by the NGO, now, it has been incorporated in the Govt. programs and is now sustainable.
Page 43 of 53
f. Revised training schedule (Participants led sessions):

Day 1, Tue 14 Feb, 2012 08:30 Day 2, Wed 15 Feb, 2012 Review Block 2 Introduction to Sphere (Vik) Break Participant arrival, Registration Block 3 The Humanitarian Charter (Vik, NMP) Lunch Block 4 Protection Principles (Vik, NMP) Break Block 1 Introduction to the course, participants video introductions, expectations (Vik, KM, CB) Block 5 The project cycle, core standards and cross cutting issues (CB, MJ) Break BREAK Day 3, Thu 16 Feb, 2012 Review Block 6 Using technical standards and indicators (Vik, MJ) Break Block 7 Code of Conduct (MJ, Vik) Lunch Block 8 Introduction to other global Q&A initiatives (Vik, Ashish) Break Day 4, Fri 17 Feb, 2012 Review Block 9: Assessment (Seemanchal, Satish, Tushar) Break Block 10: Technical Standard-WASH (Baleshwor, Mari D and Hansen) Lunch Block 11: Technical Standard-Food and Nutrition (Neha, Paras and Ashish) Break Block 11: Technical Standard-Shelter, Settlement and NFI (Raman, Kameshwor and Green) Break Block 12: Technical Standards: Health Action (Raju, Kamal. Mari R) Break Group/Individual time with trainers Dinner Break Group/Individual time with trainers Dinner Day 5, Sat 18 Feb, 2012 Review Block 13: Convergence and Coordination (Rupali, Vibash and Pramod) Break Block 14: Monitoring & Evaluation (Manu, Rajan and Solomon) Lunch Block 12: Simulation (Snehil, Jaya and Harsh) Break Q&A initiatives in context of South Asia and India (Panel: NIDM, NDMA, Prusty) Break Action Plans & Recommendation; Evaluation & valedictory (all trainers) Break Group/Individual time with trainers Dinner
09:00
10:30
11:00
12:30
13:30
15:00
15:30
17:00
17:30
Continued
Evaluation of the day
18:30 20:00
Break Group/Individual time with trainers Dinner
Break Group/Individual time with trainers Dinner
Participants led sessions
Page 44 of 53
g. Session Designs and reports of participants led sessions

1) ASSESSMENT: Session design: Sl. No. 1) 2) 3) Content Introduction to Assessment Sphere Core Standard Linkages of Assessments key messages & winding up Time 10 minutes 20 Minutes 20 Minutes Method Lecture Lecture & Discussion Lecture, Discussion, Simulation Discussion Medium PPT PPT PPT, Trainer Mr. Simanchal Mr. Satish Mr. Tushar
4)
10 minutes
PPT
Learning objectives: At the end of session participants will be able to know The importance of assessment in humanitarian response Factors influencing assessment in humanitarian response Linkages with technical standards
Key learning messages: Assessment is conducted to determine the nature of emergency and who needs support. Remember, all disasters are not emergencies. Assessments are always followed by analysis and are prerequisite for programme planning CVA, PRA are different tools used during assessment. Monitoring is a continuous form of assessment.
2) MINIMUM STANDARDS IN WATER SUPPLY, SANITATION AND HYGIENE PROMOTION: Session Objectives: At the end of this session participants will be able to: Explain the importance of WASH in Disaster Response Describe the structure of WASH in the Sphere Handbook Describe the use of Minimum Standards, Key Actions, Key Indicators and Guidance Notes for disaster response
Key Messages: The Importance of WASH in Disaster is to promote: good hygiene practices, provision of safe drinking water, the reduction of environmental health risk, and the conditions that allow people to live with good health, dignity, comfort and security.
Page 45 of 53
Seven Sections of WASH- WHWEVSD: WASH, Hygiene Promotion, Water Supply, Excreta Disposal, Vector Control, Solid Waste Management and Drainage Use of WASH standards in disaster situation
3) MINIMUM STANDARDS IN FOOD AND NUTRITION: Session objectives: Introduction of food security and nutrition and links with sphere process food security and nutrition assessment Infant and Young Child Feeding and Micronutrient Deficiency Food security
The group worked with presentations and involved participants in discussions to understand the subject. 4) MINIMUM STANDARDS IN SHELTER, SETTLEMENT AND NON-FOOD ITEMS Day 4: Block 11: Duration Theme Facilitator Aim and learning objectives of session Key learning messages Technical Standard Shelter, Settlement and Non-Food Items 90 minutes (15:30-17:00 PM) Minimum standards in Shelter, Settlement and Non-Food Items Mr. Raman, Mr. Kameshwar and Mr. Green By the end of this session, the participants would be able to: 1. List the legal instruments behind right to shelter 2. Compare various options in shelter response 3. List the basic standards, key actions and indicators in shelter response 4. List the basic standards, key actions and indicators in NFI interventions Below are the key learning messages against each objectives: Sl. No. 1. Objectives List the legal instruments behind right to shelter Key learning messages The Right to Adequate Housing (Article 11 (1)) International Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1954); Article 21. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948); Article 25. IASC Operational Guidelines on Human Rights and Natural Disasters 2006: Protecting Persons Affected by Natural Disasters There are various options of shelter response; it is not necessarily a tent or camp like structure. o Return to their dwellings o Repair of houses, support of
Page 46 of 53
2.
Compare various options in shelter response
o o
o o o
materials, tools etc. Hosting within communities (with neighbours, relatives) Rental support may be given to families who get hosted with families in community. Relief agencies need to facilitate the process. Temporary communal settlements (self settled unplanned camps) Planned and managed camps Information or advice on how to access grants, materials or other forms of shelter support from Govt. schemes and NGOs relief programs.
3.
List the basic standards, key actions and indicators in shelter response
4. List the basic standards, key actions and indicators in NFI interventions
Minimum usable surface area of 45 square meters for each person including household plots should be provided. o Includes roads and footpaths, external household cooking areas or communal cooking areas, educational facilities and recreational areas, sanitation, firebreaks, administration, water storage, distribution areas, markets, storage and limited kitchen gardens for individual households. All affected individuals have an initial minimum covered floor area of 3.5m2 per person. Cultural practices, safety and privacy of occupants in a shelter should be considered. Participatory design Local building practices and resources should be used. Govt. building codes for disaster resilient houses should be followed. Negative impact on environmental must be reduced. Relief packages should be contextualized, need based and accepted by the community. Coordination and linkages with the WASH and Food chapters should be done in NFI response. Teaching aids, resources
Time
Topic (linked to learning objectives)
Methods
Tools
Facilitator
Page 47 of 53
5 Introducing the minutes session with learning objectives 15 Legal background for minutes importance of shelter response
Sharing The facilitator will ask the participants whether shelter is a need. He/she will ask from the participants whether shelter constitutes important component in life, and if it is associated with right to life. Then he/she will ask about if they know of any legal backgrounds for shelter or housing for an individual and for the various vulnerable groups. Group readings: 5 different set of reading will be provided to each participant group for reading and reflection. The participants would share about the given information to rest of the groups. Trainer will conclude with sharing that housing is a right and is obligatory for state and humanitarian agencies to respond in shelter. And also that various vulnerable groups also have the rights
e.g. flipcharts, pens etc Slide with LCD projector Flip chart, marker
Raman Group Kameshwar reading materials on rights of different groups and vulnerable groups in shelter and housing.
Page 48 of 53
to receive shelter response. 25 Various options in minutes shelter response And Important considerations in shelter response (based on Sphere minimum standards) The facilitator will ask the participants if they have experience of shelter response in any emergencies. List the types of shelter responses on the flip chart. Ask them if they know of any other options for shelter. Ask them about what the objective of shelter program is and how we can achieve it. Think in your groups for 2 minutes and quickly give 3 options for shelter response. Share them the various options. (pg. 249-254) Shelter & Settlement Std 1-2 Facilitator asks them on any known indicator on space for shelter. Responses are collected on flip chart and discussion done if required. Sharing of standards. Facilitator asks them on 3.5 sq meter tarpaulin. Gives them chart paper to make tent of similar area PowerPoint and Flip chart, markers Raman
PowerPoint and flip chart
Page 49 of 53
(experimentation). Quick calculation on surface area. 20 Important minutes considerations in Non-Food Items interventions The facilitator gives chart paper cuttings to the participants groups and asks them to write the list of non-food items that they would like to provide in a disaster situation. Facilitator related the lists of participants groups to the relevant sections in the Sphere handbook. The facilitator explains the participants about the method of identification of food grade plastic with live demonstration. 5 Summing up and key minutes learning points 20 Questions, feedbacks minutes Raman, Green, Kameshwar Flip chart, chart paper, marker, water bottle Green
5) MINIMUM STANDARDS IN HEALTH ACTIONS Session Topic: Health Action Team Members: Raju, Kamal and Marirajan Session Objective: Describe the Impact and Structures of Health Assistance in Disaster Key Learning Points to explain the importance of Health Action in Disaster to understand the linkages of HA in Core standard, Humanitarian Charter and Cross-Cutting Issues
Page 50 of 53
to understand the priorities of Health Services in Disaster Response
Methods applied: Lecture, simulation Tools used: Video, flip chart, group work, discussion, bus stop
6) CONVERGENCE AND COORDINATION: Session plan and design: Component Theory Session Details Introduction Concepts in Coordination Stakeholders Conclusion Activity, Practice on thematic aspects Q &A Session Peer /Facilitator feedback Time 22 minutes (20%) 5 mins 7 mins 7 mins 3 mins 38 mins 10 mins 20 mins Responsibility Bibhas Rupali Pramod Rupali Bibhas/Rupali/ Pramod -
Skill Session Open House
Methods: Lecture, Games Tools: Ppt, Flip book, Meta clips, whiteboard, case study Session Objectives: Participants would be able to link the sphere standards with coordination framework Enabling objective: At the end of the session, participants would be able to List out the stakeholders Define their respective roles
for coordination & collaboration in regional DRR initiatives and emergencies Key learning: Overarching Theme Complex nature of collaboration/Coordination Use of Coordination Tool
References: Sphere Training Manuals Sphere Handbook Cross Sector Convergence A new view of Global Development IAG Odisha Resources
Page 51 of 53
Gram Unnayan Resources
Acknowledgement: Our sincere thanks to Vikrant Mahajan and the Facilitation Team
7) MONITORING AND EVALUATION: Session Objectives: By the end of this session, participants would be able to: Describe the importance of monitoring and evaluation in disaster programmes Develop a monitoring tool. Describe the application of monitoring tools in their work.
Session plan: Topic Introduction of session & objectives Importance of monitoring and evaluation in disaster programmes Develop a monitoring tool Implementation of monitoring tool Summing up and key messages Questions and Feedbacks Time 04 min. 16 min. Method Sharing on power point Sharing on power point, White board & GD Group Exercise Group Exercise Sharing on power point Facilitator K V Manu K V Manu
20 min. 20 min. 05 min. 25 min.
Rajan Gautam S David George S David George By Peer group & Mentor
Key learning points: Definition of Monitoring & Evaluation Differences and Similarity between Monitoring & Evaluation Develop Monitoring Tools Relating to Sphere Hand Book Demonstrate the implementation of monitoring tool
8) SIMULATION: This session was focused on experiential learning through the exercise of a simulation of disaster situation. The participants were given roles and they played their roles in the given disaster situation. The facilitator group controlled the situation by giving tips, news, and information at regular intervals. The simulation began with the following information: On 18/02/2012, 1:27 PM ISD an earthquake of magnitude7.1 and depth 19.7km with its epicenter in the densely populated state of Digaara with a population of 30 lakhs. GDACS estimates the likelihood for need of international humanitarian intervention to be high (Red alert).
Page 52 of 53
The districts reporting causalities and damages are Sonpur and Nahan.
Demographic Profile District: District Sonpur Nahan Distance from Capital(Desu) 300 kms 1100kms Total Population 3.5 lakh 2 lakh
Day 1: (10 minutes) Situation: No Communication lines Organize and Start Planning
Day 3: (10 minutes) Situation: Communication Lines Restored. Aftershocks continued Funding announced by Donor Agency X of USD 5 million. Preference to be given to joint proposal
Day 7: (10 minutes) Media repeatedly highlighting plight of affected population in District Nahan
Day 10: (10 minutes) Casualties increasing abruptly in Sonpur 200 people including children diagnosed with Food poisoning in a camp in Sonpur Take appropriate measures
At the end of the simulation exercise, participants experiences & reflections were collected by the facilitator team and debriefing was done to capture the learning points.
Page 53 of 53

Sphere ToT Report

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Sphere ToT Report

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Training of Trainers on The Sphere Project Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response

New Delhi, India 12th-19th February, 2012

Supported & organized by:

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

Dates: Duration: Venue: No. of Participants: Facilitators:

TOT Coordinator: Report compilation:

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

5. 5.1 5.2 5.3

Summary of key recommendations for future TOTs: ................................................. 31

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

a) Organizing Committee for the TOT

c) General purpose of training

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

g) Training Design preparations

h) Participant Group Analysis and Learning assessment

i) Strategic Training Approach

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

j) Final Training Design and Training Schedule

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

l) Learning aids used:

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

n) Participants evaluation and feedback

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

TRAINING MANAGEMENT TEAMS

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

4.5.1 Flip tips (KM)

4.5.2 What is Sphere (CB)

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

4.5.3 The Humanitarian Charter (Vik)

4.5.4 Protection Principles (Vik)

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

4.5.1 Power point tips (MJ)

4.5.2 Using technical standards and indicators (Vik)

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

4.5.3 Code of Conduct (MJ)

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

4.5.1 Cross cultural tips (Vik)

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

4.5.2 Adult learning principles (KM, MJ)

4.5.3 Assessing Learning Needs, Planning Trainings (KM)

4.5.4 Designing trainings (KM, MJ)

4.5.5 Training methodologies (MJ, CB)

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

4.5.1 Managing Nerves (Vik)

Informed /dessent participants

Differnet expectations Trainer not knowing the content

Trainers rapport with participants Space management

Contextualization of the content

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

4.5.2 Constructive feedback and evaluation (KM, Vik)

4.5.3 Training tips, dialouge, question-answer: Quality Circle (MJ, KM)

4.5.4 Introduction to participants led sessions

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

Summary of participants daily feedbacks

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

Summary of Facilitators daily and end of training review process

12-19 February, 2012 New Delhi, India

Summary of particip ants evaluation at the end of the training